A Reappraisal of the Comparative Effectiveness of Lumpectomy Versus Mastectomy on Breast Cancer Survival: A Propensity Score–Matched Update From the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB)

Novel immunotherapies for breast cancer: Focus on 2023 findings

Immunotherapy has emerged as a revolutionary approach in cancer therapy, and recent advancements hold significant promise for breast cancer (BCa) management. Employing the patient's immune system to combat BCa has become a focal point in immunotherapeutic investigations. Strategies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), adoptive cell transfer (ACT), and targeting the tumor microenvironment (TME) have disclosed encouraging clinical outcomes. ICIs, particularly programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 inhibitors, exhibit efficacy in specific BCa subtypes, including triple-negative BCa (TNBC) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive cancers. ACT approaches, including tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, showed promising clinical outcomes in enhancing tumor recognition and elimination. Targeting the TME through immune agonists and oncolytic viruses signifies a burgeoning field of research. While challenges persist in patient selection, resistance mechanisms, and combination therapy optimization, these novel immunotherapies hold transformative potential for BCa treatment. Continued research and clinical trials are imperative to refine and implement these innovative approaches, paving the way for improved outcomes and revolutionizing the management of BCa. This review provides a concise overview of the latest immunotherapies (2023 studies) in BCa, highlighting their potential and current status.

Association of clinicopathologic variables and patient preference with the choice of surgical treatment for early-stage breast cancer: A registry-based study

INTRODUCTION

Observational studies suggest that breast conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy (RT) offers superior survival compared to mastectomy. The aim was to compare patient and tumour characteristics in women with invasive breast cancer ≤30 mm treated with either BCS or mastectomy, and to explore the underlying reason for choosing mastectomy.

METHODS

Women registered with breast cancer ≤30 mm and ≤4 positive axillary lymph nodes in the Swedish National Breast Cancer Register 2013-2016 were included. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association of tumour and patient characteristics with receiving a mastectomy vs. BCS.

RESULTS

Of 1860 breast cancers in 1825 women, 1346 were treated by BCS and 514 by mastectomy. Adjuvant RT was given to 1309 women (97.1 %) after BCS and 146 (27.6 %) after mastectomy. Variables associated with receiving a mastectomy vs. BCS included clinical detection (Odds Ratio (OR) 4.15 (95 % Confidence Interval (CI) 3.35-5.14)) and clinical stage (T2 vs. T1 (OR 3.68 (95 % CI 2.90-4.68)), N1 vs. N0 (OR 2.02 (95 % CI 1.38-2.96)). Women receiving mastectomy more often had oestrogen receptor negative, HER2 positive tumours of higher histological grade. The most common reported reason for mastectomy was large or multifocal tumours (53.5 %), followed by patient preference (34.5 %).

CONCLUSION

Choice of surgery is strongly associated with key prognostic factors among women undergoing BCS with RT compared to mastectomy. Failure to control for all relevant confounders may bias results in outcome studies in favour of BCS.

Drawing causal inferences from randomized controlled trials in psychotherapy research

OBJECTIVE

Randomized control trials (RCTs) have played a critical role in psychotherapy research. This article discusses RCTs in the context of the criteria for drawing causal inferences in psychotherapy and intervention research more generally. The article also highlights underused variations of RCTs and how they not only establish causal relations but also address critical questions that can improve our intervention portfolio and patient care.

CONCLUSION

Random assignment is discussed in terms of what it can and cannot do in relation to drawing conclusions about the effects of interventions. Finally, RCTs are examined in the context of multiple questions that can guide therapy research, improve patient care, and develop treatments that reach people in need of psychological services.

Breast-Conserving Surgery or Mastectomy?: Impact on Survival

The early randomized controlled trials revealed no differences in survival between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy. However, breast cancer treatment has undergone changes, and the results of recent population-based registry studies suggest superior long-term survival after BCS. To explore the current evidence, a systematic review and meta-ana lysis of population-based observational studies from 2010 and onward was conducted.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify relevant literature. Keywords included "mastectomy," "breast conserving surgery," and "survival." The identified studies were narratively reviewed and effect sizes (hazard ratios [HRs]) for overall (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were combined with random-effects models.

Results

A total of 30 reports were included in the review, and results from 25 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Compared with mastectomy, BCS was associated with better OS (HR = 1.34 [1.20-1.51]; N = 1,311,600) and BCSS (HR = 1.38 [1.29-1.47]; N = 494,267). Selected subgroups of patients, based on lymph node status, age (<50 years/≥50 years), and radiation therapy after mastectomy (±), all showed better overall survival after BCS. The number (range 4-12) and type of prognostic variables adjusted for in the survival analyses of the studies did not statistically significantly moderate the differences in survival between BCS and mastectomy.

Conclusions

The combined findings from large population-based studies indicate that BCS is associated with survival benefit compared with mastectomy, suggesting that BCS be the recommended treatment of early breast cancer (T1-2N0-1M0) if a radical lumpectomy can be performed.

Expanding the scope, reach, and impact of evidence-based psychological treatments

The development and evaluation of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) for mental disorders represent an enormous advance with continued progress designed to understand the techniques and increase their use in clinical practice. This article suggests ways of expanding research along several fronts including the extension of the types of randomized controlled trials that are conducted, the use of more diverse samples to encompass different cultures and countries, the expansion of assessments to better reflect client functioning in everyday life, consideration of the impact of treatments for mental disorders on physical health, the careful evaluation of exceptional responders, the use of mixed-methods research, and the development of versions of EBTs that can be scaled. EBTs have been studied in well-controlled settings and extended to clinical settings, albeit less often. The least attention has been accorded their evaluation on a large scale to reach a greater portion of people in need of services but who do not receive any treatment.

Impact of Locoregional Treatment on Survival in Young Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer undergoing Upfront Surgery

BACKGROUND

Randomized, controlled trials comparing breast-conserving therapy (BCT) with mastectomy have demonstrated equivalent overall survival (OS), but recent observational studies have shown improved OS in patients undergoing BCT. These studies provide limited data on young patients who are traditionally offered mastectomy due to perceived higher disease risk. This study examines the OS in a contemporary series of young women with breast cancer undergoing upfront BCT compared with mastectomy.

METHODS

Women ≤40 years old with primary invasive T1-T2, N0-N1 breast cancer were identified from the National Cancer Database between 2006 and 2016. Patient cohorts were based according to locoregional treatment: BCT, mastectomy alone (Mx), and mastectomy with radiotherapy (Mx/RT). Kaplan-Meier method followed by Cox proportional-hazards regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were performed to account for treatment selection bias effects in OS.

RESULTS

A total of 15,611 patients met the study criteria; 9,509 patients (60.9%) had BCT, 4,020 (25.8%) had Mx/RT, and 2,082 (13.3%) had Mx alone. The median follow-up was 4.6 years (interquartile range [IQR] 3.0-6.4). After IPTW-adjustment, the 5-year OS was similar for BCT (95%), Mx (95%), and Mx/RT (94%), and there was no significant difference in OS in Mx (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.51) and Mx/RT (HR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.88-1.34) compared with BCT. Mx/RT was associated with decreased survival in patients with pT2N0 (HR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.12-2.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Among young patients with early-stage breast cancer, overall survival was equivalent regardless of surgical approach. Breast-conserving therapy remains a safe option in young women despite the clinical tendency to offer upfront mastectomy in young patients.

Does Breast-Conserving Surgery with Radiotherapy have a Better Survival than Mastectomy? A Meta-Analysis of More than 1,500,000 Patients

BACKGROUND

There have been conflicting studies reporting on survival advantages between breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS) in comparison with mastectomy. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of BCS and mastectomy in terms of overall survival (OS) comparing all past published studies.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive review of literature through October 2021 in PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE. The studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohorts that compare BCS versus mastectomy. We excluded studies that included male sex, stage 0, distant metastasis at diagnosis, bilateral synchronous cancer, neoadjuvant radiation/chemotherapy, and articles with incomplete data. We performed a meta-analysis following the random-effect model with the inverse variance method.

RESULTS

From 18,997 publications, a total of 30 studies were included in the final analysis: 6 studies were randomized trials, and 24 were retrospective cohorts. A total of 1,802,128 patients with a follow-up ranging from 4 to 20 years were included, and 1,075,563 and 744,565 underwent BCS and mastectomy, respectively. Among the population, BCS is associated with improved OS compared with mastectomy [relative risk (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.74]. This effect was similar when analysis was performed in cohorts and multi-institutional databases (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.67). Furthermore, the benefit of BCS was stronger in patients who had less than 10 years of follow-up (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent BCS had better OS compared with mastectomy. Such results depicting survival advantage, especially using such a large sample of patients, may need to be included in the shared surgical decision making when discussing breast cancer treatment with patients.

Is breast conservation superior to mastectomy in early stage triple negative breast cancer?

Purpose

Compare overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) outcomes of breast conservative therapy (BCT) and mastectomy in a large cohort of patients with early-stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), using a propensity score-based matching approach.

Methods

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to study the role of RT in early stage TNBC. Primary end points were OS and BCSS. Cox proportional hazard regression models and Kaplan-Meier plots were used to generate the desired outcomes. Propensity score matching was done to minimize bias.

Results

12,761 patients with T1-2N0M0 TNBC as their first malignancy were retrieved. Of these 7237 had lumpectomy with RT, and 5524 had mastectomy only. Age, race, marital status, tumor laterality, grade and stage, and receipt of chemotherapy were prognostic variables for OS and BCSS. Among 4848 matched subjects, the 5-year OS was significantly higher in patients with lumpectomy and RT (89%) compared to mastectomy alone (84.5%) (p-value <0.001). Similarly, BCSS was significantly higher in patients with lumpectomy and RT (93%) compared to mastectomy alone (91%) (p-value <0.001). On subgroup analysis, patients who are younger than 40 had similar survival outcomes after either mastectomy alone or lumpectomy with RT. However, those who are older than 60, have any grade or T stage had better survival outcomes with lumpectomy and RT.

Conclusions

Overall, lumpectomy followed by RT is associated with better OS and BCSS compared to mastectomy in T1-2N0M0 TNBC patients. Further research is needed to determine the optimal treatment strategy for specific patient subgroups.

•

BCT is associated with better OS compared to mastectomy in early-stage TNBC.

•

BCT is associated with better BCSS compared to mastectomy in early-stage TNBC.

•

Age, race, marital status, and grade/stage are prognostic for early-stage TNBC.

Outcomes of Breast-Conserving Surgery Plus Radiation vs Mastectomy for All Subtypes of Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Analysis of More Than 200,000 Women

BACKGROUND

Recent large retrospective studies suggest that breast-conserving therapy (BCT) plus radiation yielded better outcomes than mastectomy (MST) for women with early-stage breast cancer (ESBC). Whether this is applicable to the different subtypes is unknown. We hypothesize that BCT yielded better outcomes than MST, regardless of subtypes of ESBC.

STUDY DESIGN

Data on women diagnosed with first primary stage I to II breast cancer between 2010 and 2017 who underwent either BCT or MST were from the population-based 18 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate unadjusted 5-year overall survival and cause-specific survival. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional regression models were used to determine the impact of surgical approaches on the hazard ratios adjusted for relevant demographic and clinical variables for molecular subtype (luminal A, luminal B, triple-negative, and HER2 enriched).

RESULTS

Of the 214,128 patients with breast cancer, 41.6% received MST. For the different subtypes, BCT yielded better 5-year overall survival and cause-specific survival than MST. After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, the risk of overall survival and cause-specific survival was still statistically significantly higher among MST recipients than BCT recipients for all subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

BCT yielded better survival rates than mastectomy for women with all subtypes of ESBC. The role of mastectomy for women with ESBC should be reassessed in future clinical trials.

Choosing Mastectomy vs. Lumpectomy-With-Radiation: Experiences of Breast Cancer Survivors

Background

Annually about 280,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer. Treatment options depend on age, comorbidities, tumor stage, grade, size, and other factors. Often, patients must decide between two surgical treatment options: mastectomy or lumpectomy-with-radiation herein simply called a lumpectomy. Since both offer similar survival outcomes, the choice ultimately is the patient’s. However, most rely on inputs from doctors, family, friends, personal research, and other actions. We believe decision-making processes for future patients will be aided if experiences of prior breast cancer survivors are known. This study’s aim is to provide such information.

Methods

Feedback from prior breast cancer survivors was obtained using a 19-question survey distributed online to multiple breast cancer support groups. It focused on issues relevant to choosing between the two surgical options including, post-surgical complications, breast reconstruction, chronic pain, cosmetics, and surgery-choice satisfaction.

Results

Respondents (N=1606) had a median age of 49 years (range 26 to 88 years) and had a median body mass index (BMI) of 26.6 Kg/m². There were 978 mastectomy patients (60.9%) and 628 lumpectomy patients (39.1%). With regard to post-surgical reconstruction, 64.2% of mastectomy respondents and 13.5% of lumpectomy respondents decided to undergo breast cancer reconstruction following breast cancer surgery. Almost all (99.8%) of lumpectomy respondents had radiation side-effects; with skin irritation and thickening and chest wall tenderness being the most common. Among mastectomy patients, 94.3% had one or more complications; loss-or-changes in nipple or breast sensation, uneven breasts, chest wall tenderness, and breast swelling were the most common complications. Post-surgical pain lasting six months or more was experienced by a smaller percentage of mastectomy vs. lumpectomy patients (64.1% vs. 78%, p <0.00001). Mastectomy patients were also less likely to have pain that was persistent and present up to the time of the survey (35.4% vs. 46.0%, p=0.0002). With respect to cosmetic outcomes, mastectomy patients vs. lumpectomy patients were less likely to be either satisfied or very satisfied (52.2% vs. 62.7%, p=0.00004). Overall satisfaction of surgical treatment was 70.9% for mastectomy patients and 68.6% for lumpectomy patients.

Conclusion

Based on the experiences of these breast cancer survivors, mastectomy is associated with less chronic pain frequency and lower incidence of post-surgical side effects compared to lumpectomy. However, mastectomy is associated with lower cosmetic satisfaction. Breast cancer survivors that underwent a lumpectomy, reported being more satisfied with cosmetic outcomes but almost all reported radiation side-effects with skin thickening listed as the most common. Lumpectomy was also associated with higher chronic pain frequency compared to mastectomy.

The overall surgical treatment satisfaction reported by mastectomy and lumpectomy respondents was similar. The composite findings will provide information that will aid future breast cancer patients in making a decision between having a mastectomy or a lumpectomy.

Mini review: The FDA-approved prescription drugs that target the MAPK signaling pathway in women with breast cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer and the prevalent type of malignancy among women. Multiple risk factors, including genetic changes, biological age, dense breast tissue, and obesity are associated with BC. The mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) signaling pathway has a pivotal role in regulating biological functions such as cell proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis, and survival. It has become evident that the MAPK pathway is associated with tumorigenesis and may promote breast cancer development. The MAPK/RAS/RAF cascade is closely associated with breast cancer. RAS signaling can enhance BC cell growth and progression. B-Raf is an important kinase and a potent RAF isoform involved in breast tumor initiation and differentiation. Depending on the reasons for cancer, there are different strategies for treatment of women with BC. Till now, several FDA-approved treatments have been investigated that inhibit the MAPK pathway and reduce metastatic progression in breast cancer. The most common breast cancer drugs that regulate or inhibit the MAPK pathway may include Farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTIs), Sorafenib, Vemurafenib, PLX8394, Dabrafenib, Ulixertinib, Simvastatin, Alisertib, and Teriflunomide. In this review, we will discuss the roles of the MAPK/RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway in BC and summarize the FDA-approved prescription drugs that target the MAPK signaling pathway in women with BC.

Signaling pathways governing breast cancer stem cells behavior

Breast cancer is the second common cancer and the leading cause of malignancy among females overall. Breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs) are a small population of breast cancer cells that play a critical role in the metastasis of breast cancer to other organs in the body. BCSCs have both self-renewal and differentiation capacities, which are thought to contribute to the aggressiveness of metastatic lesions. Therefore, targeting BCSCs can be a suitable approach for the treatment and metastasis of breast cancer. Growing evidence has indicated that the Wnt, NFκB, Notch, BMP2, STAT3, and hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathways govern epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) activation, growth, and tumorigenesis of BCSCs in the primary regions. miRNAs as the central regulatory molecules also play critical roles in BCSC self-renewal, metastasis, and drug resistance. Hence, targeting these pathways might be a novel therapeutic approach for breast cancer diagnosis and therapy. This review discusses known signaling mechanisms involved in the stimulation or prevention of BCSC self-renewal, metastasis, and tumorigenesis.

Refusal of cancer-directed surgery in male breast cancer

It has been reported that some male breast cancer patients may refuse the recommended surgery, but the incidence rate in the United States is not clear. The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence, trends, risk factors, and eventual survival outcomes associated with the rejection of such cancer-directed surgery.We collected data on 5860 patients with male breast cancer (MBC) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, including 50 patients refusing surgery as recommended. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression were used to identify the effects of refusing surgery on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). The association between acceptance or rejection of surgery and mortality were estimated by nested Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustment for age, race, clinical characteristics, and radiation.Of the 5860 patients identified, 50 (0.9%) refused surgery. Old age (≥65: hazard ratio [HR]: 3.056, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.738-5.374, P < .0001), higher AJCC stage (III: HR: 3.283, 95% CI: 2.134-5.050, P < .0001, IV: HR: 14.237, 95% CI: 8.367-24.226, P < .0001), progesterone receptor status (negative: HR: 1.633, 95% CI: 1.007-2.648, P = .047) were considered risk factors. Compared with the surgery group, the refusal group was associated with a poorer prognosis in both OS and CSS (χ2 = 94.81, P < .001, χ2 = 140.4, P < .001). Moreover, significant differences were also observed in OS and CSS among 1:3 matched groups (P = .0002, P < .001).Compared with the patients undergoing surgery, the patients who refused the cancer-directed surgery had poor prognosis in the total survival period, particularly in stage II and III. The survival benefit for undergoing surgery remained even after adjustment, which indicates the importance of surgical treatment before an advanced stage for male breast cancer patients.

Long-term Survival Comparison of Repeated Breast-conserving Surgery Versus Mastectomy for Patients with DCIS with Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence: A Real-world Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Although patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) harbor excellent overall survival (OS) after breast-conserving therapy, the evidence regarding to surgical management for ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) is scarce. This study aimed to assess the prognosis of repeated breast-conserving surgery (BCS) versus mastectomy for IBTR in DCIS survivors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, 5344 DCIS cases with IBTR were identified during 702,748 person-years of follow-up, 3532 (66.09%) received mastectomy, and 1812 (33.91%) received repeated BCS. Cox regression and competing risk regression were employed to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for OS and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), which was respectively calculated within spontaneous and matched cohorts.

RESULTS

After adjustment for confounders, no statistically significant survival difference was observed between the repeated BCS and mastectomy for patients with DCIS with IBTR. The stratified analyses further revealed that patients with DCIS with IBTR receiving repeated BCS combined with radiation therapy were associated with both superior OS (HR, 0.79; CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .04) and BCSS (HR, 0.54; CI, 0.33-0.90; P = .02) compared with counterparts undergoing mastectomy. Furthermore, patients with DCIS who were age older than 60 years at IBTR diagnosis benefit from repeated BCS with radiotherapy (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.24-0.84; P = .01) than mastectomy.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that repeated BCS with radiation therapy deserves consideration when DCIS survivors suffered IBTR. The choice of surgical management should be tailored based on patients' age at IBTR diagnosis and size of recurrent disease.

10-Year Survival after Breast-Conserving Surgery Compared with Mastectomy in Louisiana Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Louisiana has the third highest breast cancer mortality in the US, despite ranking 30th in incidence. Whether surgical approach contributes to such a poor outcome is unknown. We compared outcomes of breast-conserving surgery plus radiation (BCT) vs mastectomy (MST) for Louisiana women with early-stage breast cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

Data on women diagnosed with Stage I-II breast cancer from 2004 to 2016 were analyzed from the Louisiana Tumor Registry. Overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between BCT and MST. Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to compare survival curves, and logistic regression was used to examine the association of sociodemographic and clinical factors with the type of breast cancer surgery. Values of p < 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Of the 18,260 patients, 9,968 patients (54.6%) had BCT and 8,292 patients (45.4%) had MST. Compared with BCT, the MST group tended to be underinsured/Medicare/Medicaid, more impoverished, had higher stage 2 disease, were more likely to reside in rural regions, travel ≥25 miles to radiation treatment facility, be treated at low volume centers, and have T3, node positive, and poorly differentiated tumors. Ten-year OS and CSS were significantly better among those who had BCT (OS: 80.0%; 95% CI: 79.0%-81.1%; CSS: 92.7%; 95% CI: 92.1%-93.4%) than those having MST (OS: 69.3%; 95% CI: 68.0%-70.5%; CSS: 88.8%:95% CI: 87.9%-89.7%) (p < 0.05). Even after controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables, MST was associated with a 28.6% increased risk of death from all causes (hazard ratio [HR]:1.286; 95% CI:1.197-1.380) and a 29.8% increased risk of breast-cancer specific death (HR:1.298; 95% CI: 1.150-1.465).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical approach, a factor that is within the control of the surgeon, has an impact on mortality for Louisiana women with early-stage breast cancer.

Radiotherapy plays an important role in improving the survival outcome in patients with T1-2N1M0 breast cancer - a joint analysis of 4262 real world cases from two institutions

Background

To compare the survival outcomes between breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and modified radical mastectomy (MRM), and to investigate the role of radiotherapy (RT) in patients with pT1–2N1M0 breast cancer.

Methods

A total of 4262 women with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer treated at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 3858 patients underwent MRM, and 832 (21.6%) of them received postoperative RT (MRM + RT). A total of 404 patients received BCS plus postoperative RT (BCS + RT). All patients received axillary lymph node dissection, while 3.8% of them had upfront sentinel node biopsy. The association of survival outcomes with different surgical modalities (BCS vs. MRM) and the role of RT were evaluated using multivariable proportional hazards regression and confirmed by the propensity score-matching (PSM) method.

Results

At a median follow-up of 71 months (range of 6–230 months), the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of the BCS and MRM groups were 96.5 and 92.7%, respectively (P = .001), and the corresponding 5-year disease-free-survival (DFS) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates were 92.9 and 84.0%, and 2.0 and 7.0% (P = .001), respectively (P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that RT was an independent prognostic factor for improved OS (P = .001) and DFS (P = .009), and decreased LRR (P < .001). However, surgery procedure was not independently associated with either OS (P = .495), DFS (P = .204), or LRR (P = .996), which was confirmed by PSM analysis.

Conclusion

Postoperative radiotherapy rather than the surgery procedures was associated with superior survival outcomes in patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer.

Breast reconstruction in France, observational study of 140,904 cases of mastectomy for breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

In France, there are few up-to-date epidemiological data on breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer. The objective of the present study was to measure immediate and delayed breast reconstruction (IBR and DBR, respectively) rates and thus the proportion of patients not benefiting from any reconstruction.

METHODS

We performed an observational study by assessing data from the French nationwide discharge summary database (Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information) for the period 2008-2014. All women having undergone a total mastectomy for breast cancer during this period were included. We then searched for reconstructive surgery during the initial or subsequent hospital stays, and recorded the time interval between mastectomy and reconstruction.

RESULTS

Among the 140,904 mastectomies included, the IBR rate was 16.1% on average, and increased over the study period. The time interval between mastectomy and DBR was≤3 years in 92% of cases. For patients included in 2008 and 2009, the DBR rate was 17.8%, and the non-reconstruction rate was 66.4%.

CONCLUSION

The high proportion of women not undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy suggests that access to this procedure should be improved.